If all cyclists waited at the red light...

doozerie

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Just to try to quantify the risk and danger involved, I can't think of one road death or case of serious injury that was due to a cyclist breaking a red light in living memory - can you?

I'm not sure what the point of your question is but here goes... Do I know for sure that a cyclist has been killed or seriously injured due to their breaking a red light? No, but I wouldn't expect to read any account in the media of such an incident which stated that the cyclist broke a red light (wouldn't expect to read it in relation to a motorist being killed or seriously hurt either, incidentally).

I've certainly seen cyclists nearly hit by a car/truck/bus as a direct result of the cyclist breaking a red light, I've also seen near collisions between cyclists and pedestrians again where a cyclist ignored the red. Etc.

Your focus on death or serious injury is odd too. I've seen quite a few collisions between cyclists and other cyclists (mainly in races) and pedestrians. I've been involved in a few myself over the years. Thankfully I've not incurred serious injury myself as such (several months of treatment on my back doesn't count), but I've seen others break bones, lose teeth, and suffer suspected concussion - none of those injuries would be formally categorised as "serious" in a news report, I'd imagine, but I'm sure those that incurred the injuries would prefer not to have been hurt despite no-one having died or been "seriously injured".

And for what it's worth I've seen a few pedestrians hit by cars and a bus after they walked or ran in front of moving traffic, they all walked/limped away in a hurry immediately afterwards. The lack of death or serious injury in those incidents wouldn't have me consider putting myself in front of moving traffic as anything other than reckless/stupid, and certainly extremely dangerous.

Baby01032012

jon1981 wrote: »

But why?

Some would argue a majority of cyclists break red lights yet I've not heard this to be a reason for any cyclists deaths on the road.

Again I'm not a red light jumper but there are plenty of junctions that could be relaxed abit for cyclists such as pedestrian crossings or left turns on to quieter roads. We need to be far more progressive here

Seriously, so it’s ok to risk hitting a pedestrian. There may not have been cyclists deaths from breaking red lights but there have been some very serious injuries sustained by pedestrians from being hit by cyclists.

amcalester

Baby01032012 wrote: »

Seriously, so it’s ok to risk hitting a pedestrian. There may not have been cyclists deaths from breaking red lights but there have been some very serious injuries sustained by pedestrians from being hit by cyclists.

Were those cyclists running red lights though?

mr spuckler

cdaly_ wrote: »

Agreed. You can stop, press the pedestrian button and then wait (for aaggesss...).

I've been meaning to contact somebody about it too. Perhaps now is the time.

if doing so, maybe also mention the state of the crossing at the baths. I'll throw it in my emails too.

Alanstrainor

cdaly_ wrote: »

Agreed. You can stop, press the pedestrian button and then wait (for aaggesss...).

I've been meaning to contact somebody about it too. Perhaps now is the time.

And to add to the madness, that button should be on both sides, but you have to cross onto the wrong side of the track to press it. Then wait 3 minutes for any movement. Joke.

Weepsie

Baby01032012 wrote: »

Seriously, so it’s ok to risk hitting a pedestrian. There may not have been cyclists deaths from breaking red lights but there have been some very serious injuries sustained by pedestrians from being hit by cyclists.

Whataboutery warning ahead!

The most serious injury sustained from a pedestrian, cyclist collision (in Ireland) was the death of a cyclist when the pedestrian (well jogger) was in the bike lane.

I wish people would have this concern for me, when they are contstantly stepping out into the road staring vacuously beyond me as I approach them at speed. They don't see a car coming, so their musn't be traffic right?

It's a very regular occurence, and I see as many cyclists put at risk by dopey pedestrians as I do vice versa

AndrewJRenko

Baby01032012 wrote: »

but there have been some very serious injuries sustained by pedestrians from being hit by cyclists.

How many is 'some' ? Say over the last three years, how many of these 'very serious injuries' have occured?

doozerie wrote: »

I'm not sure what the point of your question is but here goes... Do I know for sure that a cyclist has been killed or seriously injured due to their breaking a red light? No, but I wouldn't expect to read any account in the media of such an incident which stated that the cyclist broke a red light (wouldn't expect to read it in relation to a motorist being killed or seriously hurt either, incidentally).

That's not true. In any case of cyclist death and most cases of motorist death, every detail of the incident is available in the media over time, whether from the Coronor's inquest or a prosecution of the other party or legal suit for damages or an RSA investigation. All the detail is there.

The reason why you haven't heard of a cyclist being killed as a result of going through a red light is because it hasn't happened.

doozerie wrote: »

I've certainly seen cyclists nearly hit by a car/truck/bus as a direct result of the cyclist breaking a red light, I've also seen near collisions between cyclists and pedestrians again where a cyclist ignored the red. Etc.

Your focus on death or serious injury is odd too. I've seen quite a few collisions between cyclists and other cyclists (mainly in races) and pedestrians. I've been involved in a few myself over the years. Thankfully I've not incurred serious injury myself as such (several months of treatment on my back doesn't count), but I've seen others break bones, lose teeth, and suffer suspected concussion - none of those injuries would be formally categorised as "serious" in a news report, I'd imagine, but I'm sure those that incurred the injuries would prefer not to have been hurt despite no-one having died or been "seriously injured".

And for what it's worth I've seen a few pedestrians hit by cars and a bus after they walked or ran in front of moving traffic, they all walked/limped away in a hurry immediately afterwards. The lack of death or serious injury in those incidents wouldn't have me consider putting myself in front of moving traffic as anything other than reckless/stupid, and certainly extremely dangerous.

Your focus on the danger caused by cyclists is odd, given that we have motorists killing 3 or 4 people on the road each week and maiming many more.

magicbastarder

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The reason why you haven't heard of a cyclist being killed as a result of going through a red light is because it hasn't happened.

this is an extraordinary claim. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

weiland79

I got shouted at this morning by a man that THOUGHT i was going to break a red light

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

this is an extraordinary claim. absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Not really - well perhaps I should have put some time boundary on it, like the last five years perhaps. Irishcycle.com has tracked every cyclist death over that time, and there has been no case involving breaking a red light, to the best of my knowledge.

But if I am off the wall on this, it should be fairly easy to prove me wrong.

Ray Bloody Purchase

weiland79 wrote: »

I got shouted at this morning by a man that THOUGHT i was going to break a red light

Careful now!!

Chips Lovell

I know someone who got properly (bike damagingly) rear-ended by another cyclist who expected him to break a red and thus didn't anticipate him stopping. The rear-ender wasn't apologetic either.

Tenzor07

Are these Red light threads about as useful as compulsory helmets and road tax threads, i.e. they are pretty much what the non-cycling motoring public bring up every time there's talk of the MPD law and penalty points for parking in cycling lanes?

There's been some wholesale verbal slaughter of all cyclists on the Journal.ie the past few days...

doozerie

AndrewJRenko wrote:

The reason why you haven't heard of a cyclist being killed as a result of going through a red light is because it hasn't happened.

If you say so. To be honest, I don't go seeking out such details of traffic incidents, my knowledge or not of whether someone died due to the breaking of a red light is entirely unreliable. I've certainly seen cyclists being given medical attention at or near junctions where traffic lights were in operation, I've no idea of the circumstances but if the question interests you so much maybe next time I see such a scenario I'll stop and ask the person being treated. Just to warn you though, "Yes, I broke the red light" is not the kind of statement I'd expect any person, cyclist or otherwise, to make in the aftermath of a collision.

Your fixation on death (formerly a fixation on "death or serious injury" but I notice you've moved on from that) is, frankly, bizarre. Are you about to suggest that if no-one has died breaking a red light then it's perfectly acceptable behaviour, or something?

Incidentally, I personally don't recall any incidence of someone having died due to a motorist having broken a red light either (though, again, I don't go looking for this info when I read of a fatality on the roads, which I realise is just slacking on my part). Should I assume that it's not a dangerous behaviour then?

AndrewJRenko wrote:

Your focus on the danger caused by cyclists is odd, given that we have motorists killing 3 or 4 people on the road each week and maiming many more.

If buses were responsible for no deaths as a direct result of running red lights, should we stop calling for bus drivers to abide by the rules of the road then? Or do we do the rational thing and seek to highight risk that is introduced unnecessarily as and where we can, in the hope that we can influence peoples' behaviour for the better?

I've already mentioned earlier about incidents where other cyclists breaking red lights have put me at risk by the way. Your posts seem to suggest that you believe such behaviour poses no risks, if that's the case then I suggest you are entirely misguided.

magicbastarder

i have witnessed a cyclist being knocked off his bike because he ran a red. amusingly, he looked to me to be a witness on his behalf.

homer911

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Some go too far !

I was cycling up the slip road towards UCD from Donnybrook. The marked cycle lane is actually covered by the traffic lights i.e the traffic lights are to your left as you cycle.

I stopped on red. About three other cyclists came from behind and cruised straight ahead. The next guy came galloping through - intending to go straight ahead - and zipped diagonally across the junction to go around the tail end of about 20 students coming from UCD towards the Montrose Hotel and who were crossing legitimately.

The apprehension of being rear ended by a fellow cyclist makes me feel some days like Fr. Ted praying that God will please turn the traffic light green

In most cases, its safe for cyclists to proceed through this red light as they are staying on the cycle track and can see if the coast is clear. On one occasion I was approaching this junction behind another cyclist. The light was red and a bus had stopped, so visibility for cyclists was zero. Next thing a blind person, using a white cane, appears from in front of the stopped bus, using the pedestrian crossing. The cyclist in front was lucky to avoid a collision and just about stopped in time!


Talk about the worst possible scenario!

shootermacg

Regularly we read in the news, how a driver was dead / in bad shape after running into a tree.

A TREE!

That tree must have jumped some red lights and I can confirm it wasn't in day-glow from head to toe or root to leaf even.

Moflojo

I'm beginning to think this entire thread is an example of "internalised oppression" whereby an oppressed group comes to use against itself the methods of the oppressor.

"If we all behave the way the motorists (dominant group/oppressors) want us to, maybe they will respect us?"

"You guys (within the minority group) who break the rules are angering the oppressor therefore it's your fault that we're oppressed." (Rather than blaming the actual oppressor.)

What do you think of my pseudo-psychological analysis?

Chips Lovell

Moflojo wrote: »

I'm beginning to think this entire thread is an example of "internalised oppression" whereby an oppressed group comes to use against itself the methods of the oppressor.

"If we all behave the way the motorists (dominant group/oppressors) want us to, maybe they will respect us?"

Possibly for those making that particular argument. But I haven't noticed too many taking that line.

Thinkingaboutit

People should be watchful and be safe, whichever way works, but be courteous. I'm finding myself having to watch for light breaking cyclists while crossing on my own bike from Thomas St from Ship St (I think) to Thomascourt / Coombe. Obviously the lorry and cars breaking red lights while I should be passing on to Cork St, are more serious.

amcalester

shootermacg wrote: »

Regularly we read in the news, how a driver was dead / in bad shape after running into a tree.

A TREE!

That tree must have jumped some red lights and I can confirm it wasn't in day-glow from head to toe or root to leaf even.

That means there was drink taken.

mr spuckler

amcalester wrote: »

That means there was drink taken.

or a good dose of sleepies occurred. wasn't there something reported yesterday saying that 10% of drivers admitted nodding off at the wheel?

edit...yip, there was.

Weepsie

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Not really - well perhaps I should have put some time boundary on it, like the last five years perhaps. Irishcycle.com has tracked every cyclist death over that time, and there has been no case involving breaking a red light, to the best of my knowledge.

But if I am off the wall on this, it should be fairly easy to prove me wrong.

Death doesn't have to be the outcome to indicate something is dangerous. Just like in the GAA/Croke Park ticket thread, you are really, really jumping the shark a bit.

I've seen more than enough close calls from RLJers to know that often enough it is a stupid thing to do. There are times when it is of course safe to do and that should be legislated for, but your fixation on the worst possible outcome is misguided. Minor accidents happen all the time, and go unreported.

CramCycle

weiland79 wrote: »

I got shouted at this morning by a man that THOUGHT i was going to break a red light

Been there, very confusing and funny in equal measure.

Moflojo wrote: »

I'm beginning to think this entire thread is an example of "internalised oppression" whereby an oppressed group comes to use against itself the methods of the oppressor.

"If we all behave the way the motorists (dominant group/oppressors) want us to, maybe they will respect us?"

The people who dislike cyclists now will not start to like cyclists if every single cyclists was a shining example of good and proper road behaviour. The same way you see some people getting agitated by motorists who obey the speed limit on roads they "feel" you can go faster on. Changing your behaviour to appease them doesn't actually work, unless you really are a complete numpty and annoying every one, not just a subset. The truth is these people will be annoyed by any perceived slight, often when none is there. These are the people who overtake to reach traffic 25m down the road, who run ambers because they feel the traffic in front was too slow to take off, left hook people because they feel that the 0.5second saved in reaching the next junction is worth more than you are. No change in behaviour by any other road user will change their opinion, if you accomodate them, they move the goalposts, not much different than trying a civilised conversation with a fanatic on twitter, it is a waste of time.

"You guys (within the minority group) who break the rules are angering the oppressor therefore it's your fault that we're oppressed." (Rather than blaming the actual oppressor.)

I obey the rules because it is the right thing to do, I have also found it safer. I could get away with breaking the rules quite a bit without consequence for me, in my opinion but then I look around at those who do it on my morning commute and don't notice all the people who adapt, sometimes majorly, what they were doing to insure them safe passage. Quite often it involves running red lights, and they miss someone coming from a junction they barely glanced at or perceived as being slower than they were. This applies equally to all road users. being right and thinking your right are often two very different things.

What do you think of my pseudo-psychological analysis?

I get where your coming from because I think there are a variety of viewpoints that sound similar when you only type out part of your view but I don't think you are correct.

gk5000

Moflojo wrote: »

I'm beginning to think this entire thread is an example of "internalised oppression" whereby an oppressed group comes to use against itself the methods of the oppressor.

"If we all behave the way the motorists (dominant group/oppressors) want us to, maybe they will respect us?"

"You guys (within the minority group) who break the rules are angering the oppressor therefore it's your fault that we're oppressed." (Rather than blaming the actual oppressor.)

What do you think of my pseudo-psychological analysis?

Have to re-read it several times but I get the drift.


I think it's more like the Church or Communist Party - Do as I say but not as I do - in other words about being in control and controlling others.


People who selectively disregard the law/rules themselves on reflectors/bells - pontificate on laws/rules on red lights etc to others.

bilbot79

jon1981 wrote: »

But why?

Some would argue a majority of cyclists break red lights yet I've not heard this to be a reason for any cyclists deaths on the road.

Again I'm not a red light jumper but there are plenty of junctions that could be relaxed abit for cyclists such as pedestrian crossings or left turns on to quieter roads. We need to be far more progressive here

Totes. American cars can turn right on red sometimes. Cyclists here should turn left on red when safe to do so

CramCycle

gk5000 wrote: »

Have to re-read it several times but I get the drift.


I think it's more like the Church or Communist Party - Do as I say but not as I do - in other words about being in control and controlling others.


People who selectively disregard the law/rules themselves on reflectors/bells - pontificate on laws/rules on red lights etc to others.

Most people know the rules of the road and or the principles through osmosis alone (metaphorically). There is no justifiable excuse for not understanding them when stopped by a Gardai. Bikes are regularly sold without bells or reflectors. Ask anyone on the street general ROTR and it would be a rare thing to have bells or reflectors mentioned.

gk5000

work wrote: »

You just cannot help yourself:
If there was a garda car beside you would you disregard the laws as you state? If you are so well qualified as to know exactly which laws and situations apply to you perhaps run for office and help implement your version of law otherwise obey the rules. Who are you to decide what is safe, most people feel obeying the rules is safe?
Your scenario of going 20 yards up a street the wrong way says it all, why not just get off and walk. Too lazy as well as socially ignorant.
If you really find law abiding cycling so uncomfortable perhaps stop cycling because I am sick of idiot behavior like your bringing cyclists into disrepute and making the relationship between road users divisive. Play by the rules or get out of the game.

I really would like to see more people cycling but you are not needed or wanted by most other cyclists. Before you state that others break the rules that may be true on occasion but they are not stating they do it as a matter of course.

I don't think you understand what I am saying. I respect the law,law enforcement, courts etc. but just decide to disregard certain laws when I think it is safe - like I believe most people do.

Besides I'm not totally stupid - course I stop if a guard is there.

But 2 things:
1. Are you a cyclist and do you have bell/reflectors? Do you really obey all rules a cyclist, pedestrian, motorist?

2. Are you really a cyclist? Are you really suggesting to walk (up the one way street)? Are you the designer of the current cycle lanes?

CramCycle

bilbot79 wrote: »

Totes. American cars can turn right on red sometimes. Cyclists here should turn left on red when safe to do so

The difference is (having lived in the US for awhile) there is a respect for this rule, people stop, check ad if there is any doubt, they do not move. Over here it would be a bunch of chancers and lets not BS each other by saying otherwise.

gk5000

CramCycle wrote: »

Most people know the rules of the road and or the principles through osmosis alone (metaphorically). There is no justifiable excuse for not understanding them when stopped by a Gardai. Bikes are regularly sold without bells or reflectors. Ask anyone on the street general ROTR and it would be a rare thing to have bells or reflectors mentioned.

The point is that the law states that they are required (to protect the cyclist and the public - and I fully agree with the reflector one).
Ignorance of the law or lack of enforcement is never an excuse - legally or otherwise.

Anyway, now that you know shall you rectify the situation? and shall all the other posters purge their contempt for the laws? Or shall you decide that these laws do not apply to you or are not important?

My main point is that people who selectively ignore one law, get bent out of shape by people who ignore other laws - and that is simply indefensible hypocrisy.